One of the things Mark recommends is to read the newspaper regularly, particularly because when interviewing, or dealing with people in general, it's good to have this as something to chit-chat about, and to demonstrate your general intelligence with. You have to show you're an informed person, and just capable of chatting a bit.
I don't read the news, and I actually think I'm more informed for it, since I'm not being swayed and swept up in every breaking story as it emerges, but instead waiting for things to settle down and zooming out. Trying to stay abreast of the news was always a great stressor for me, particularly because I'm acutely aware how biased and poor most reporting is, and how much energy I'd have to put into chasing stories up to get different sides on it. Also, it's just very myopic: most news reporting is done there, in the heat of the moment. It's the "first draft of history" as I've heard it called, and that's a great analogy. It's the first draft. But some of us are willing to forgo the immediacy, and the ability to stay abreast of all the minute and particular details, in return for something more polished and focused, such as you get in monthly periodicals.
So, I don't think Mark is right in saying that this is absolutely necessary. I have an interview coming up, and I'm going to dip back into the news, stay abreast up until the interview, in case what Mark says is true. But beyond that I am simply going to drop it again.
Is there anyone here who does like I do? Have you had any trouble, not being aware of everything as it's unfolding?